HandBrake

Can anyone tell me if its possible to use the proposed presets discussed here:
http://handbrake.fr/pastebin/pastebin.php?show=424
with the current version?

I've been trying to find CRF settings that will work with my 720p HDTV captures and I keep ending up with files that are larger than the originals. My last attempt was to use the HIGHPROFILE/TELEVISION and change the bitrate setting to a quality setting of 59%. My 3 gig capture file ended up as a 5.2gig mkv.

I'm really hoping the new presets will help.

thanks,

You just enter the equivalent settings.

yeah, but how do I figure out what
-e x264 -q 0.59 -a 1 -E ac3 -B 160 -R Auto -6 auto -f mkv -P -m -x ref=3:mixed-refs:bframes=3:weightb:direct=auto:b-pyramid:b-adapt=2:me=umh:subme=9:analyse=all:8x8dct:trellis=1:no-fast-pskip=1:psy-rd=1,0.1 --detelecine --decomb

means?

Some of it is obvious, but a lot of it doesn't easily match up with the options on the advanced tab.

that means encoding with x264 at CQ 59%, audio (I think) is ac3 track encoded to aac at 160 kbps, mkv container, and the rest (minus the --detelecine --decomb part) just goes in the x264 settings box.

*sigh*

That's not even one of the current proposed presets. Why would you ignore everything after the first post in the thread?

jbrjake wrote:*sigh*

That's not even one of the current proposed presets. Why would you ignore everything after the first post in the thread?

The thread I referenced only has two posts and the proposed highprofile/television settings are identical.

I'll just sit tight until the stop being "proposed" and move into release.

thanks anyways.

rcrh wrote:The thread I referenced only has two posts and the proposed highprofile/television settings are identical.

Care to provide a link? The only thread I'm aware of is the one in Development with 15 replies... The most recent proposals are dated March 4th.

I just started using Handbrake to convert my movies so I can play on my AppleTV...and have been very pleased thus far. My only regret is that I didn't find it sooner, and didn't spend $50 on another software that didn't work too well with the first movie I tried (lip sync, etc).

I was just curious if there is a general time frame of when version 0.9.4 will be released. If the planned released was in the relatively near-term (few months), and there planned to be noticeable improvements in quality, etc...then I might not rush as much to get my entire library converted ASAP. If the answer is "we can't/don't commit to release dates"...I completely understand the reasons behind that also. Just seeing if there were any estimates.

Thanks a lot. Glad to have found this software.

Rob

There isn't really anyway we can say when a release will be done. It's open source. It'll be done when it's done.

In other words, it could be a few months, or it could be many.

There are always quality/performance improvements release on release.

rob97ag wrote:"we can't/don't commit to release dates"

There will likely be several developer snapshots posted here before any public release. They are un announced except here in the forums, so keep an eye for that. Of course the above quote still applies to dev snapshots.

TedJ wrote:

rcrh wrote:The thread I referenced only has two posts and the proposed highprofile/television settings are identical.

Care to provide a link? The only thread I'm aware of is the one in Development with 15 replies... The most recent proposals are dated March 4th.

Sure. Its the one at the top of this thread. Here it is again.
http://handbrake.fr/pastebin/pastebin.php?show=424

It only has two posts and the proposed preset in question is the same.

As I said, I'll sit tight and wait.

rcrh wrote:It only has two posts and the proposed preset in question is the same.

What is your problem? Read the thread. There are many posts. The presets by the end of the thread *are not the same* as the ones in the pastebin at the start. It's my thread. I know very well what's in it, and you are definitely *not* using the most recent list of presets I proposed. This is one of the craziest arguments I've ever seen here, and that's saying a lot when it was less than a day ago that a user was insisting 0.9.3 handles soft subs.

jbrjake wrote:...This is one of the craziest arguments I've ever seen here, and that's saying a lot when it was less than a day ago that a user was insisting 0.9.3 handles soft subs.

Completely crazy. Everyone knows that softsub support is reserved for the special dev/mod only builds...

jbrjake wrote:

rcrh wrote:It only has two posts and the proposed preset in question is the same.

What is your problem? Read the thread. There are many posts. The presets by the end of the thread *are not the same* as the ones in the pastebin at the start. It's my thread. I know very well what's in it, and you are definitely *not* using the most recent list of presets I proposed. This is one of the craziest arguments I've ever seen here, and that's saying a lot when it was less than a day ago that a user was insisting 0.9.3 handles soft subs.

Dude, chill out. I don't have a problem but you seem to be slightly off your meds. I think I said twice in this threat that I'll happily sit back and wait for the profiles to make there way into a release. If that is your idea of an ARGUEMENT then you have some serious stress levels in your life and you need to find betters ways to vent.

Now, to your point; no where did I provide a link to your THREAD. I only referenced the pastebin link. I honestly don't remember how I came across it. Maybe it was through your thread and maybe not. I don't remember.

So, in the name of peace and harmony, let me state again that I'm happy to sit back and wait for the the profiles to find their way into a release.

Its great that so many people offer help around here. But perhaps emotions get escalated too much.

Namaste.

Hi, I have just registered because I'm having the same question. A week ago, I compared the new proposed presets (posted 3/03 by jbrjake) and made my own preset, mixing in all info of that thread, the "DVD to H264 at full quality with handbrake?" thread, and whatever personal feelings I had that day (*)
EDIT: forgot to mention: also constant quality preset influenced me (towards lower psy-trellis and lower CQ)

When I did that, there was one thing I was uncertain about: the b-adapt=2 x264 setting. I looked up what it means, and found it's some "newer" algorithm. So I started wondering if the older 0.9.3 maybe has an older x264 build, that maybe doesn't support b-adapt=2. So I didn't copy that into my preset.

So, it's a minor thing, but is b-adapt=2 ok for 0.9.3? And in general, are users of 0.9.3 missing out on anything important in terms of new x264 features? For the few encodes that I do, I don't care if it's slower... but I do care for maximum image quality at given bitrate

Oh, and let me take the opportunity - first post - to thank the devs on this nice piece of software. Many thanks.


(*) FWIW, I ended up with this (for DVD to mkv conversion, retaining 'archival' quality) - I'm actually still testing a bit between -q 0.60 and -.605. I'm quite happy with the output quality, so I'm trying to see how much I can squeeze the filesize.

I noticed in the new 0.9.4 proposed presets e.g. : + High Profile: -e x264 -q 20.0 .....

in 0.9.3, the -q tends to be around 0.59 - 0.62 as per most posts & recommendations. So how could it be -q 20.0 ? is -q using a different range in 0.9.4 ?

TIA

It's using RF now

ok thanks.

for others stumbling on this, a little elaboration: I managed to google my way to some handbrake IRC logs that discuss that as of 0.9.3, -q values are handled as percentages if between 0.0 and 1.0, and as RF (rate factor) if > 1. From a few logs of my recent runs, I figure that -q 20.0 is roughly -q 0.608

I suppose it's all quite minor, but if anyone knows: And in general, are users of 0.9.3 missing out on anything important in terms of new x264 features (in 0.9.4-svn)? For the few encodes that I do, I don't care if it's slower... but I do care for maximum image quality at given bitrate